OnlineBookClub.org

From what I've read so far, I believe that this book is based on research rather that the author's (Dr. Sylvie Beljanski) opinions. The research had been started and even tested by Dr. Beljanski's father who was also a Doctor.

edith38 wrote: ↑01 Jan 2019, 10:22 The author has a degree in law not in any form of medicine, research or health. However, she bases her claims on her father's work who was a molecular biologist and she is speaking in the name of a company that aim is to "brings together science and nature to create high quality, innovative health and beauty products". Do you feel that the book is based on a sufficient level of research to back its claims?

I must say, I am torn trying to decide whether this book is based on fact or opinion. Though her father was a molecular biologist, which legitimizes some of the ideas in this book, I would venture to say that this book is more opinion.

Even though the Research was conducted by a close person, it doesn't mean it can't be to the point. However, I would suggest reading this book along with others as a comparison, to get more scientific opinions.

If the author has additional skills it should be specified. His father's vision may be different from his. I think I'll have to read the book again so I can judge perfectly.

Dr Mirko Beljanski PhD left behind something like 133 peer-reviewed research papers. His daughter Sylvie doesn't make any claims for his research that she doesn't meticulously cross-reference to a source or back up with footnotes. In that respect, it isn't just an opinion that she's putting forward here, it's a theory (or theories) supported by documented evidence. However, other questions then arise: how reliable is this evidence? to what extent does it support her conclusions? To answer these with any degree of authority, you would need (in my opinion) to have some kind of medical or scientific training.

The book seems to be well researched because a lot of notable studies were cited and one can tell that the author has a lot of passion for the topic.

I think that she has gone specific research about the matter because she is a professional and perhaps, she cares about the reputation of her book.

I haven't read the whole book. The forward was written by an attorney who had a positive experience with alternative medicine. The author presented respected cancer research created by her father that is very promising for persons with certain medical conditions. So I think that the book contains topics that can be considered both opinions and the results of research.

I don't think this book is based on extensive research on cancer treatment. The author's opinion is based on her father's biological research which nobody can trust unless the medicines are proved effective on cancer patients.

I've not finished the book, but if it has the proper sources cited I don't see why her lack of formal education in the medical sciences prevents it from being accurate.

Personally, I think that the author gets ready by doing a lot of researches, interviews, and personal knowledge to make this book. It appears pretty well on the product.

Beljanski is not an expert in this specific field, however, I do not think this in anyway detracts from her knowledge about the subject. Sometimes people who have been exposed to a certain area of study, as is the case where her father's molecular biology expertise may have carried over into some of the things she picked up, have more knowledge of said subject than people who may be deemed as experts in their field. I think it's an amalgamation of the two, opinion and research, which made it, yes, slightly biased but also valid.

I think that you don't need a degree in a certain subject to tell others our write a book, you just need to know the subject well. So if the learned from her father, who is a qualified expert then she should be entitled to speak on the subject

I think that while the book is opinion based, her opinion stems from her belief in her father's research. It is a bit of both opinion and research.

Just because she doesn't have the official background in medicine doesn't change the fact that her arguments were well-detailed and credible. It's not as if she went and Googled the majority of her points or they were unfounded - she experienced most of these events firsthand.